This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
RE: jump_table_data and active_insn_p
- From: Paulo Matos <pmatos at broadcom dot com>
- To: Steven Bosscher <stevenb dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 12:01:29 +0000
- Subject: RE: jump_table_data and active_insn_p
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <19EB96622A777C4AB91610E763265F464313C4 at SJEXCHMB14 dot corp dot ad dot broadcom dot com> <CABu31nPd-+NEqP7FNR3X5ewRPmzpb94J=_FnfaRY88w-F7Tdpw at mail dot gmail dot com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Bosscher [mailto:stevenb.gcc@gmail.com]
> Sent: 05 May 2014 10:11
> To: Paulo Matos
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: jump_table_data and active_insn_p
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Paulo Matos wrote:
> > Why is jump_table_data an active_insn?
> > int
> > active_insn_p (const_rtx insn)
> > {
> > return (CALL_P (insn) || JUMP_P (insn)
> > || JUMP_TABLE_DATA_P (insn) /* FIXME */
> > || (NONJUMP_INSN_P (insn)
> > && (! reload_completed
> > || (GET_CODE (PATTERN (insn)) != USE
> > && GET_CODE (PATTERN (insn)) != CLOBBER)))); }
> >
> > It is clear that someone [Steven Bosscher] thought it needs fixing
> but what's the problem with just removing it from the OR-expression?
>
> Places using active_insn_p, next_active_insn, prev_active_insn, etc.,
> need to be audited to make sure it's safe to remove JUMP_TABLE_DATA
> from the OR-expression.
>
> I've done most of that work, but it needs finishing and for that I
> need to find some time.
> See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-11/msg03122.html
>
Fair enough.
Thanks for the explanation.
Paulo Matos
> Ciao!
> Steven